[Cite as State v. Dawson, 2016-Ohio-3215.]
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
TWELFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT OF OHIO
BUTLER COUNTY
STATE OF OHIO, :
Plaintiff-Appellee, : CASE NO. CA2015-07-137
: DECISION
- vs - 5/31/2016
:
KENNETH E. DAWSON, :
Defendant-Appellant. :
CRIMINAL APPEAL FROM BUTLER COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
Case No. CR2015-02-0304
Michael T. Gmoser, Butler County Prosecuting Attorney, Government Services Center, 315
High Street, 11th Floor, Hamilton, Ohio 45011, for plaintiff-appellee
John T. Willard, P.O. Box 35, Hamilton, Ohio 45012, for defendant-appellant
Per Curiam.
{¶ 1} This cause came on to be considered upon a notice of appeal, the transcript of
the docket and journal entries, the transcript of proceedings and original papers from the
Butler County Court of Common Pleas, and upon a brief filed by appellant's counsel.
{¶ 2} Counsel for defendant-appellant, Kenneth E. Dawson, has filed a brief with this
court pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), which (1)
indicates that a careful review of the record from the proceedings below fails to disclose any
Butler CA2015-07-137
errors by the trial court prejudicial to the rights of appellant upon which an assignment of
error may be predicated; (2) lists one potential error "that might arguably support the appeal,"
Anders at 744, 87 S.Ct. at 1400; (3) requests that this court review the record independently
to determine whether the proceedings are free from prejudicial error and without infringement
of appellant's constitutional rights; (4) requests permission to withdraw as counsel for
appellant on the basis that the appeal is wholly frivolous; and (5) certifies that a copy of both
the brief and motion to withdraw have been served upon appellant.
{¶ 3} Having allowed appellant sufficient time to respond, and no response having
been received, we have accordingly examined the record and find no error prejudicial to
appellant's rights in the proceedings in the trial court. The motion of counsel for appellant
requesting to withdraw as counsel is granted, and this appeal is dismissed for the reason that
it is wholly frivolous.
M. POWELL, P.J., HENDRICKSON and PIPER, JJ., concur.
State v. Dawson
Combined Opinion